THE IMPACT OF REDUCING

FOOD LOSS IN THE

GLOBAL COLD CHAIN

Preliminary Report
C. G. Winkworth-Smith, W. Morgan
and T. J. Foster
September 2014

FUNDED BY A GRANT FROM

CRC3656-ReportCoverFINAL.indd 1

11/17/14 8:45 AM

University of Nottingham

September 2014

Table of Contents
1.

Executive summary........................................................................................................... 5

2.

Introduction...................................................................................................................... 6

3.

Survey responses.............................................................................................................. 6

4.

Initial findings ................................................................................................................... 7

4.1

Food Loss vs Food Waste............................................................................................ 7

4.2

How much food is lost or wasted? ............................................................................. 8

4.2.1

Developing countries........................................................................................... 8

4.2.2

Developed Countries .......................................................................................... 9

4.3

What are the major causes of food loss?................................................................. 11

4.3.1

Developing countries......................................................................................... 11

4.3.2

Developed countries ......................................................................................... 12

4.4

How could food loss in the perishables supply chain be reduced? ......................... 13

4.4.1

Improved infrastructure.................................................................................... 13

4.4.2

Investment in the cold chain ............................................................................ 13

4.4.3

Improved regulations ........................................................................................ 13

4.4.4

Better ordering systems .................................................................................... 13

4.4.5

Charity food banks ............................................................................................ 13

4.4.6 Technology ............................................................................................................ 14

4.4.7

Packaging innovations....................................................................................... 14

4.4.8 Training/education ................................................................................................ 14

4.4.9

Use ugly food..................................................................................................... 14

4.4.10 Food processing................................................................................................... 15

4.4.11 Large retailer practices ........................................................................................ 15
4.4.12 Behavioural changes............................................................................................ 15
4.4.13 Farming practices ................................................................................................ 15
4.5
What would be the financial cost of reducing food loss in the perishables supply
chain? .................................................................................................................................. 16
4.6

What would be the impact of reducing food loss in the perishables supply chain? 17

4.7
How many more people could be fed if food loss in the perishables supply chain
was reduced? ...................................................................................................................... 18
4.8

What are the possible approaches to unavoidable loss utilisation?........................ 18

University of Nottingham

September 2014

4.8.1 Charity Food Banks............................................................................................ 18

4.8.2 Composting........................................................................................................ 18
4.8.3 Animal Feed....................................................................................................... 18
4.8.4 Anaerobic digestion/renewable energy............................................................ 19
5.

Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 20

6.

References ....................................................................................................................... 21

Appendix 1.

Stage 1 survey questions ............................................................................... 22

Appendix 2.

Questionnaire responders ............................................................................. 23

Appendix 3.

Further comments on infrastructure............................................................. 24

Appendix 4.

Post-harvest cassava losses ........................................................................... 25

Appendix 5.

Post-harvest loss in Kenya ............................................................................. 26

University of Nottingham

September 2014

1. Executive summary
While almost a billion people are undernourished worldwide, a third of all food produced
globally is lost or wasted. If food loss could be reduced, many more people could be fed. To
identify the main causes of food loss around the world we are in the process of contacting
experts from different geographical regions and areas of expertise. We have focussed
primarily on the supply chain of perishable foods from harvest to the point of supply to
consumers. This report outlines our initial findings from the survey responses.
Food waste generally relates to behavioural issues and is often defined as edible food that
has been unutilised as a result of human action or inaction. Food loss on the other hand is
food that has decreased in quality and is no longer fit for human consumption due to
inadequate supply chain systems. In developing countries, the lack of access to cold chain
systems and reliable energy sources required to power them, results in large post-harvest
losses (10-50% food loss). Other causes of food loss include poor harvesting practices, poor
supply chain management and insufficient or inappropriate regulations. In developed
countries where there are already advanced cold chain systems in place, food waste, which
is generally related to behavioural issues where edible food has been unutilised and
subsequently thrown away, is a much larger issue, for example, one quarter of the items in
the average American refrigerator right now will go in the trash. However, there are also
losses caused by poor temperature management, improper handling, bad retailer practices
(such as rejection of goods due to cosmetic defects) and the lack of skilled employees.
Perishable food losses in both developed and developing countries could be reduced by
improving infrastructure, increased investment in the cold chain, improved regulations,
better forecasting and technological innovations. Behavioural changes are also needed for
both retailers and consumers which could be brought about by changes in governmental
policy and improved education and training. The major impacts of reducing food loss would
be to lower levels of global food insecurity (for example, by reducing food loss in the USA
by 15% there would be enough food to feed more than 25 million Americans), a reduction
in environmental impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions or pressure on land use for
farming and lower food prices. Although much of the food loss can be reduced it is
important to fully utilise any unavoidable food loss. Any food that is still edible but no
longer able to be sold to consumers should go to charity food banks but there needs to be
better integration with the for profit sector to minimise the cost of food recovery. Other
ways of utilising food loss include composting, the production of animal feed or power
generation through anaerobic digestion. This will save money and reduce the amount of
food that currently goes to landfill.
As the survey progresses we hope to further investigate the causes of perishable food
loss and identify solutions to reduce perishable food loss globally.

University of Nottingham

September 2014

2. Introduction
The Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) estimates that almost a third of all food
produced globally, or 1.3 billion tons of food is lost or wasted every year (Gustavsson et al.,
2011). A number of experts, from a broad range of fields including academia, commerce,
NGOs and governments and from different geographical regions have been contacted to
enable us to produce a more accurate picture of where food is lost in the supply chain and
what measures can be implemented to reduce this loss.
Whilst there have been a number of studies looking at food loss in relation to grains we will
instead be focussing on the transport, storage and retail display systems of perishable
commodities (e.g. meat, fish, fruit, vegetables and dairy products) between producers and
consumers. We will be exploring the entire (potential) cold chain process from harvesting or
slaughtering all the way through to the point of supply to the consumer.
The survey is being conducted using a Delphi methodology that will be developed in three
rounds. The first round is in the form of a questionnaire and is currently being sent out. The
participants have been asked to state their area of expertise and to which region or country
their expertise relates so that as the study progresses the answers can be categorised by
expertise or region. The experts have also been asked to be as country/region specific when
answering the survey questions which will enable us to identify regional differences in the
causes and ways of reducing food loss.
This preliminary report summaries our initial findings from the first stage of the survey.

3. Survey responses
The research is being supported by the management consultancy Global 78 Limited, and
they have so far contacted 227 people and have received 62 acceptances.
Table 1 shows the number of people contacted by the University of Nottingham using
the contacts generated by Global 78. Please see Appendix 1 for the survey questions and
Appendix 2 for a full list of the questionnaire responders.
A number of the people we have contact so far have been on holiday during August,
therefore there has been some difficulty in getting responses but we expect the number
of replies to increase in September as people return to work. However, although this
preliminary report is based on limited feedback, the survey findings to date have
provided us with novel insights. The responses we have had so far are from a wide range
of expertise and leaders in their respective fields.
The University of Nottingham has recently joined the save Food initiative of the FAO
which will help to bring the study to a wider audience. By utilising the contacts from save
Food we hope to increase the number of experts participating in the study.
University of Nottingham

September 2014

There have been some responders that have declined to complete the survey as they
have felt they were unable to answer the questions.
Table 1. The number of people contacted for the first phase of the survey as of 29.08.14

Europe
Middle East
Africa
Asia
N America
Latin America
Global
Total
Commercial
Academia
Government
NGO
Total

Questionnaires
sent out
17
1
3
2
9
0
21
53
19
16
3
15
53

Completed and
returned
4
0
1
2
5
0
4
16
7
3
0
6
16

Declined
3
0
0
0
0
0
3
6
4
1
0
1
6

Pending
10
1
2
0
4
0
14
31
8
12
3
9
31

4. Initial findings
4.1 Food Loss vs Food Waste
Food waste generally relates to behavioural issues and is often defined as edible food
that has been unutilised as a result of human action or inaction (Buzby and Hyman,
2012). Food loss on the other hand is food that has decreased in quality and is no longer
fit for human consumption due to inadequate supply chain systems.
However, these definitions often do not adequately describe the complexity of why, how
and where food is lost in different countries:
We should be careful about the word lost. In most developing countries, even if food is not
ultimately consumed by humans in the post farm gate supply chain (SC), it is consumed by
animals or processed. (Marc Sadler, World Bank).

It may therefore be better to delineate between that which is lost as a consequence of

transport, SC actions and that which is lost due to expiry as a consequence of quality or
food safety regulations from points of retail sale. (Marc Sadler, World Bank).
A further distinction that can be made is between physical and economic losses (Diego
Naziri, University of Greenwich)
Physical loss (PL) is something that disappears from the chain, thrown away
(regardless of whether this in unavoidable or not see behavioural issues)

University of Nottingham

September 2014

Economic loss (EL) is something that incurs some level of damage (e.g. partially
spoiled or broken cassava root) that determines a price discount or processing into
lower value product.

4.2 How much food is lost or wasted?

4.2.1 Developing countries
There is very little data on food waste in the developing world. The figures for food loss are
hard to quantify and are dependent on the types of foods and the countries where they are
produced but estimates are in the range of 20-50% (Kader, 2012).

In Sub Saharan Africa, 36% of food harvested is lost, equating to an average 167
kg/cap per year where only 7 kg is at the consumer level. The losses mainly occur at
harvest: 12.5%, post-harvest 12.7%, processing and packaging 4.5%, distribution
4.6% (FAO, 2013b).

Asia-Pacific region 15-50% of food crops are lost (FAO, 2013a).

South Asia = 8-40% (Acedo and Easdown, 2014)
o India = 30% (vegetables and fruits)
o Bangladesh = 8-25%
o Nepal = 8-33%
o Pakistan = 15-40%
o Sri Lanka = 16-40% (vegetables and fruits)
Southeast Asia = 9-25% (Weinberger et al., 2008)
o Cambodia = 16-25%
o Laos = 9-17%
o Vietnam = 18-19%

Dr Diego Naziri (University of Greenwich) and his team have investigated cassava losses in
different developing countries. They have:
1. Broken down the value chains in sub-value chains (e.g. cassava starch, cassava chips,
etc.),
2. By means of value chain analyses we have assessed the magnitude of PL at 4 stages
of the chain: on farm; processing; transport trading and handling; distribution retail
and consumption
3. Assessed the magnitude of EL by looking at the last stage of the chain when the root
is still traded fresh and analysed the price setting mechanism in order to quantify the
price discount
4. Calculated the monetary impact of physical and economic post-harvest loss (PHL)

University of Nottingham

September 2014

From their analysis they have found differences in the PHL of cassava in different countries:

Ghana: PL: 1.8 mln t/yr (12.5% of annual production), mostly at the last stage of the
value chain (VC); monetary impact: USD 390mln/yr. EL: 2.4 mln t/yr; monetary
impact: USD 130mln/yr.
South-West Nigeria: PL: 480k t/yr (7% of annual production), mostly at processing
sites; monetary impact: USD 31mln/yr. EL: 1 mln t/yr; monetary impact: USD
21mln/yr.
Thailand: PL: 500k t/yr (2% of annual production), mostly on farm; monetary impact:
USD 46mln/yr. EL: 1.2 mln t/yr; monetary impact: USD 48mln/yr.
Vietnam: PL: 300k t/yr (3% of annual production), mostly at processing sites;
monetary impact: USD 21mln/yr. EL: 2.7 mln t/yr; monetary impact: USD 36mln/yr.

4.2.2 Developed Countries

In developed countries, due to more advanced cold chain systems, food wastage is a far
bigger problem and is a behavioural rather than infrastructure issue. Due to the varying
definitions of food loss and food waste it is difficult to provide figures just relating to
either loss or waste.
4.2.2.1 USA
A recent Boston Consulting Group (BCG) study done for Feeding America, estimated
from field to manufacturer there is "50B lbs of potentially recoverable waste and in
local markets there is "20B lbs of potentially recoverable waste (figures include all
food loss and waste). (Daniel Krohm, Feeding America)
In 2010, an estimated 31% or 133 billion pounds of the 430 billion pounds of food
produced was not available for human consumption at the retail and consumer
levels. This amount of loss totalled an estimated $161.6 billion, as purchased at
retail prices. 141 trillion calories per year, or 1,249 calories per capita per day, in
the food supply in 2010 went uneaten (Buzby et al., 2014).

The majority of this waste ends up in landfill (Buzby and Hyman, 2012).
In the USA, consumers throw away approximately 25% of all the food and drinks
that consumers buy, either due to spoilage or cooking or serving too much are
thrown away (Gunders, 2012).
One quarter of the items in the average American refrigerator right now will go in
the trash, according to the NRDC (Gunders, 2012)
In the U.S. people have become preoccupied with the aesthetics of food, an
estimated 20% of edible- but not necessarily pretty-fruits and vegetables go to
waste (Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC))
20-30 % of quality loss is due to improper temperature and atmosphere in a long
and complex perishable cold chain lost sales due to waste and spoils and costly
labor to remove unsaleable product. (Joan Rosen, JC Rosen Resources)

University of Nottingham

September 2014

 The top three food groups in terms of the value of food loss at these levels are:
meat, poultry, and fish (41%); vegetables (17%); and dairy products (14%) (US
Department of Agricultures Economic Research Services Loss-Adjusted Food
Availability data)
Per household (2.4 persons) waste at the consumer level was $936/year or
$2.56/day (Buzby and Hyman, 2012)
4.2.2.2 Europe
France: In collective catering, 100g per meal is wasted (and about 50g lost)
(ADEME, 2011).
Germany: 10,970,000 tons 61% households, 17% industrial production, 17% large
scale consumers, 5% retail (Kranert, 2012)
o In the meat chain around 12-22% is lost or wasted (Rossaint and
Kreyenschmidt, 2014). See Table 2 for poultry losses.
Table 2. Wastage in the fresh poultry chain (catering not included) (Rossaint and Kreyenschmidt,
2014).
Waste (%)

Processing

Logistics

Wholesaler

Logistic

Retailer

Consumer

Total

0.5

2.5

12

UK: 14,391,000 tons manufacturing: 2,591,000 tons, households: 8,300,000 tons,

others: 3,500.000 tons (Quested and Johnson, 2009)
Austria: In the food industry some 1.25 million tonnes of food residues are
estimated to be generated in the food processing industry annually (Reisinger et al.,
2012). Of these about 200,000 tonnes are treated as waste (Umweltbundesamt
estimates). The rest seems to be used as feed. Some 85,000 tonnes may be
preventable annually (Reisinger et al., 2012).
o Table 3 shows an estimation of the annual Austrian food waste generation in
the services sectors and during final consumption together with an estimation
of the preventable part. Roughly 50% of the food waste generated in the
services and consumption sectors are regarded as being preventable.
o The total amount of preventable food waste over the whole supply chain
of Austria is estimated to lie at about 350,000 tonnes annually or at 42
kg/inhabitant annually.

University of Nottingham

10

September 2014

Table 3. Estimation of Austrian food waste generation in the services sectors and during final
consumption (Schneider et al., 2012).
Preventable and partly preventable
food waste
Min

Total food waste generation

Max

Min

Max

tonnes/year
158,000

Mixed municipal waste

Biotonne

276,000

49,000

91,000
0

8,000

81,000

Feeding

13,000

3,000

Sewage

13,000

84,000

37,000

114,000

228,000

385,000

404,000

665,000

Homecomposting

Total food waste

181,000

4.3 What are the major causes of food loss?

4.3.1 Developing countries

Fruit, vegetables, meat, fish and dairy are inherently perishable and without proper
transport and storage their usable life is dramatically decreased. The lack of access to
cold chain systems and reliable energy sources required to power them is therefore the
major cause of food loss in developing countries. The cost of importing diesel or setting
up hydroelectric or solar power stations in rural areas or war torn regions is often
unsustainably high which results in storage facilities that have been built standing idle
(please see Appendix 3. below for a detailed explanation on the need for effective
infrastructure by David Williams, IMechE). The lack of access to a cold chain starts at the
farm gate all the way through to the processing and retail of the goods. There are also
many other causes of food loss, including:
Harvesting practices
o Poor harvest timing (e.g. when it is too hot which leads to dehydration)
o Poor harvesting methods where food is left in the field
o Substandard harvesting equipment
o Poor hygiene (e.g. dirty hands or containers)
o Poor sorting where pests or diseases are not detected or the mixing of
good and bad quality products together during grading which lowers the
overall quality
Supply chain management
o Lack of quality control in managing post-harvest collection and storage
o Lack of sufficient systems controls in processing/packaging of food
o Failures in operation and maintenance of storage facilities
Government and policy
o Poor regulations that impedes innovation and trade
o Lack of unified and coherent national policies
o Lack of market mechanisms to reward cold chain investments
University of Nottingham

11

September 2014

Please see Appendix 4 for a more detailed look at the post-harvest losses of cassava in
different developing countries and Appendix 5 for a detailed explanation for postharvest losses in Kenya.
4.3.2 Developed countries

In developed countries there are usually advanced cold chain systems in place. The majority
of food that goes unused is due to consumer waste. However, there are still substantial food
losses within the supply chain. The major causes of food loss are uncertainties in forecasting
demand and therefore overproduction and oversupply. Often this happens during the
change from one season to another when shoppers are changing their eating patterns or
when weather affects sales and consumption.
Daniel Krohm describes the food loss that Feeding America receives:
At the beginning of the supply chain, Feeding America receives a large amount (~600MM
lbs) of produce loss from growers/packers/shippers. This loss is primarily due to over
production or product being out of spec.
At the end of the supply chain, Feeding America receives a large amount of perishable food
waste (produce, protein, dairy) from consumer facing retail outlets (~1,200MM lbs). This
retailer waste is driven by the traditional drivers of perishable shrink at retail,
unpredictability of demand, handling damage, etc.

Forecasting can also be a problem in collective catering, for instance, when too many meals
are prepared because the staff do not know how many guests/patients will be present each
day. There is also loss/waste due to incorrect portion sizes for different types of people (e.g.
the elderly).
There are further problems associated with:
Inconsistent cold chain
o Poor temperature management (Raab et al., 2011)
o Breaks in the cold chain
Improper handling, including rotation
Long transportation times
Retailer practices.
o Penalty clauses levied on growers.
o Rejection of goods due to cosmetic defects
o Exclusive contracts
o Variation of purchase contract terms in last hours before supply
o 3 for 2 offers where consumers over buy
Lack of skilled employees (e.g. butchers who cut the meat incorrectly)
Lack of possibility to use the surplus food as feed or as donation
University of Nottingham

12

September 2014

4.4 How could food loss in the perishables supply chain be reduced?
4.4.1 Improved infrastructure

The storage of perishable goods depends not just on the storage facilities themselves but
also transport facilities, roads, bridges, electricity and water supplies and effective
drainage and sanitation. It is crucial that storage facilities have access to affordable and
dependable energy. Road networks need to be improved, for instance turning rural roads
into all-weather roads.
4.4.2 Investment in the cold chain

In much of the developing world there is no cold chain. Affordable and efficient
cold storage facilities must be developed.
o In Africa, charcoal coolers have been developed which use locally available
materials.
Investment is needed which can be helped by public/private partnerships.
Reduced taxation of the cold chain and related energy equipment would make
cold chains more financially viable.
If a cold chain is already in place there must be strict adherence to food safety
regulations. If perishable food is kept at its optimum temperature for its entire
lifecycle food loss will be reduced.
4.4.3 Improved regulations

There need to be stronger links between food safety and actual perishability. This
would mean that food is still safe but there is a broader level of quality.
There needs to be improved labelling.
In developing countries, the transportation of foodstuff on open trucks should be
prohibited.
4.4.4 Better ordering systems

Better forecasting and more accurate ordering are needed. Many retailers have
implemented automated order practices based on previous sales at the store
level. This will help to reduce overproduction.
Better forecasting could also reduce loss with large scale consumers such as
hospitals only providing the number of meals necessary as well as greater
flexibility in portion size.
4.4.5 Charity food banks

Food that has passed its sell by date so cannot be sold by retailers is often still fit for human
consumption. Charity food banks, such as Feeding America, usually collect food from
retailers that have over ordered or manufacturers that have over produced. Similarly,
second chance food stores in disadvantaged neighbourhoods are being set up which sell
University of Nottingham

13

September 2014

food that is past its shelf date, but still within the window of being edible. However,
better integration with the for profit supply chain is needed to minimize the cost of
hunger relief food recovery.
4.4.6 Technology

Smart refrigerators that alert you to food thats about to go bad

Developing adaptable varieties of fruits and vegetables that have longer shelf lives
R&D to develop technologies or adapt and optimize existing technologies to suit
local situations
Improved shelf life models
4.4.7 Packaging innovations

Packaging that reduces condensation or the growth of bacteria will substantially reduce
food loss. Intelligent packaging must be implemented such as time temperature
indicators (TTI) which are devises or labels that show the accumulated time-temperature
history of food or other temperature sensitive products.
The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) has developed a Super Bag that is able to
extent the germination life of seed for planting from 6 to 12 months, reduce live insects
to 1 insect/kg of grain without using insecticides and improves head rice recovery of
stored grain by 10%.

Figure

1.

IRRI

Super

Bag.

(source

http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/) 4.4.8 Training/education

Improve education at supply chain levels regarding how and why food is lost
Better handling practices
Stock rotation
Better operation and maintenance of storage facilities
Diligent temperature control
Improved positioning - e.g. avocados not besides tomatoes

4.4.9 Use ugly food

Promote appeal of imperfect produce Europe (Joan Rosen, JC Rosen Resources)

University of Nottingham

14

September 2014

Culinary Misfits a catering company in Berlin that uses only ugly vegetables
Rewe Group Nonconformist produce
Edeka Nobody is perfect
U.K. Tesco encourage consumers to buy ugly or misshapen fruits & vegetables
(in response to recent national statistics that revealed that up to two-fifths of
produce is wasted because it is ugly)

4.4.10 Food processing

Processing certain foods will extend their lifespan, for example, freezing, freeze drying or
canning. By processing food close to where it is produced will lower the need for a cold
chain. In times of excess, food that would otherwise be lost can be stored. In developing
regions where farmers are on a small scale there will be a need to organise farmers into
groups to ensure consistent production that will motivate investors to build processing
facilities.
4.4.11 Large retailer practices

Businesses should start by understanding the extent and opportunity of their own waste
streams and adopting best practices. For example, Stop and Shop was able to save an
estimated $100 million annually after an analysis of freshness, shrink, and customer
satisfaction in their perishables department. Other retailer practices that must be
improved include:

Banning of exclusive contracts

Supermarkets could be compelled to adhere to normal commercial practices
Reduction of stock in house to reduce the percentage of stock going off
One later for the price of two now
There must also be improved supply chain connectivity between retailers/processors
and producers.

4.4.12 Behavioural changes

LeanPath of Portland Oregon:

Data drives behavioural change....His
customers...have seen waste drop by 80% after installing his system. The system
works by weighing food that is to be tossed, and showing companies, in real time,
how much and what types of food are being wasted. (Joan Rosen, JC Rosen
Resources)
4.4.13 Farming practices

Food that is of insufficient quality for retailers but still edible is often left in fields to rot,
however, this food can be processed for other foods, for instance using imperfect fruits
to produce jams and jellies. There is need to engage specialists to educate farmers on
how to minimize these losses.

University of Nottingham

15

September 2014

4.5 What would be the financial cost of reducing food loss in the perishables
supply chain?
Many of the financial costs associated to reducing food loss are for infrastructure,
particularly in the developing world. It is highly dependent on country and product,
ranging from simple wooden/Styrofoam packaging for bulk transportation through to
complex and expensive freeze drying plants. (Marc Sadler, World Bank).
The financial cost will largely depend on the approach selected. Below are the costs of
different approaches in Kenya (Sammy Kariuki, Tymax):
Capacity Building: A consultant would charge between USD 300 to USD 450 to
train a maximum of 30 people per day
Cold storage facilities: A charcoal cooler unit would cost from about USD 125 to
as high as USD 2,000, a refrigerated container would cost USD 7,500 while a cold
room would cost from about USD 20,000 onward
Value addition: A simple value addition unit would cost from USD 250 (e.g.
homemade juice) and a modern value addition unit that would accommodate
huge volumes costs from USD 200,000 and above
Roads: The cost would vary depending on the type selected for example tarmac
would cost USD 375,000 to 750,000 per km
There are also costs associated with charitable food donations:
The cost of perishable food recovery for the Feeding America network varies from $0/lb
to $.25/lb. The network spends >$800MM lbs to move ~4B lbs of food annually. To close
the entire domestic meal gap by scaling the existing hunger relief model, it would take
~$1.5B incremental annually. (Daniel Krohm, Feeding America)
I recently met with a stone fruit packer who evaluated the cost of packing off-grade fruit
for food banks instead of diverting it to culls for cattle feed. Until they can get to breakeven it is not financially feasible, currently it would still be a cost to them, but they are
working with the trade associations to find some solutions and alternatives. (Joan
Rosen, JC Rosen Resources)

However, money will be saved by reducing food loss. For example, The United States spends
about $1 billion a year just to dispose of food waste. In 2012, more than 36 million tons of
food waste was generated, with only 5% diverted from landfills and incinerators for
composting (http://www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/foodwaste/).

University of Nottingham

16

September 2014

4.6 What would be the impact of reducing food loss in the perishables
supply chain?
Reducing food loss would impact many areas. Whilst many are very positive, for instance
better food security there may also be some negative effects. Some of the largest
impacts include:
Health
o Lower levels of food insecurity (this will be discussed further in the next
section)
o Improved food safety
o Enhanced nutrition
Environment
o Reduction in the environmental impacts of food loss
o Reduction in the pressure on farming areas since less production is required
Finance and trade
o Lower food prices
Accelerated poverty reduction
Negative incentive for investment
Less income for farmers
o Reduction in the cost of waste management
Negatively affects anaerobic digestion plants and other businesses
around food waste utilisation
o Decrease in the reliance on food imports
o More vibrant rural economy due to more job opportunities and secondary
enterprises supporting production and postharvest requirements
o Make certain businesses (e.g. cassava) more attractive for private sector
investment in Sub-Saharan Africa. This would contribute to make cassava
move from a primarily subsistence crop to a commercial crop. This in
turns would trigger adoption of higher yielding varieties and input.
o A more efficient food value chain can be functional to an import
substitution strategy (saving Forex):
For instance high quality cassava flour (HQCF) is a partial
substitute of wheat flour in the baking industry and perfect
substitute of starch in a number of industrial sectors.
Government and policy
o Better integration of both private and public agendas

University of Nottingham

17

September 2014

4.7 How many more people could be fed if food loss in the perishables
supply chain was reduced?
It was estimated that if the global food loss and waste (one-third of total production) can
be halved, the saved food could feed one billion more people (Gustavsson et al., 2011).
This will have a great impact in Asia-Pacific. The Asia-Pacific region has 578 million
people suffering from hunger (62.5% of global hunger) and 1.5 billion people afflicted by
micronutrient deficiency or hidden hunger (75% of global total). The principal cause of
hunger is poverty which is also serious in the region where twothird of the worlds poor
live (FAO, 2008, FAO, 2012).
Gunders (2012) has estimated that by reducing food loss in the USA by 15% there would
be enough food to feed more than 25 million Americans.
To address hunger in the U.S. based on current levels of food insecurity there is an
annual need of "8.5B meals (1 meal = 1.2lbs) to feed 49MM people. (Note: Food
insecure individuals do not typically source all of their meals through hunger relief
channels.) The Feeding America network provides "3.5B meals annually. With >70B
lbs of potentially recoverable food waste generated in the U.S. for profit supply chain,
the total need of the food insecure in the U.S. could be addressed via food waste
recovery. (Daniel Krohm, Feeding America)
However, meaningful data must be obtained that links food insecurity issues connected
to food loss with poverty, and how food loss is connected with food insecurity for both
the working poor and those in poverty in the United States and elsewhere to discover
regional issues.

4.8 What are the possible approaches to unavoidable loss utilisation?

4.8.1 Charity Food Banks

Food that has passed its sell by date so cannot be sold by retailers is often still fit for
human consumption. Charity food banks, such as Feeding America, usually collect food
from retailers that have over ordered or manufacturers that have over produced.
4.8.2 Composting

Composting food rather than disposing of it in landfill has multiple benefits such as reducing
the amount of methane produced in landfills and producing cost effective natural fertiliser.
4.8.3 Animal Feed

Historically, food waste was commonly used as animal feed. In the developing world
much of the food waste is still used as animal feed, however, following the BSE (bovine
spongiform encephalopathy) outbreak in the 1980s, in the UK and much of Europe, the
University of Nottingham

18

September 2014

feeding of processed animal protein (PAP) to most farm animals was prohibited.
Subsequently, the foot-and-mouth outbreak led to the UK prohibiting the feeding of animals
of catering waste that had been in contact with animal products. Some of these restrictions
are in the process of being relaxed, but stringent safety and processing regulations must be
put in place. One third of all cereals produced worldwide are used for animal feed rather
than directly for human consumption (FAO, 2013) so any food waste that could be used to
reduce this number will be a huge benefit.
4.8.4 Anaerobic digestion/renewable energy

Anaerobic digesters (AD) convert food waste into biogas (60% methane, 40% carbon dioxide
and traces of other gases such as hydrogen sulphide) using naturally occurring microorganisms. The biogas can be used to produce electricity and heat, while the digestate (the
indigestible material) can be used as fertiliser. The biogas can also be purified into pure
methane which can be used as road fuel or added to the mains gas grid. AD plants can come
in a variety of sizes from those used by local authorities or industry to much smaller farm
scale units (Figure 2).
However, there are regulations that must be adhered to in many countries when using
AD. Meat and other products of animal origin must go through a process of
hygienisation to ensure that there is sufficient pathogen removal so that the treated
digestate can be used as fertiliser.

Figure 2. The Biffa AD plant used by Sainsburys supermarket in Staffordshire, UK (left) and a small
scale AD unit produced by SEaB Energy. Images from www.waste-management-world.com and
www.seabenergy.com respectively.

University of Nottingham

19

September 2014

5. Conclusion
Reducing food loss is a global priority as it will help feed the many starving people around
the world as well as reduce the huge environmental impact associated with food loss. The
survey responses have enabled us to identify where and why food loss occurs. The causes of
food loss in the developing world are predominantly due to a lack of cold chain systems and
affordable and reliable energy. Substantial investment in infrastructure is needed as well as
education on how to transport and store perishable food. In the developed world, where
there is already a cold chain in place, there needs to be better temperature management to
avoid breaks in the cold chain. Retailer practices must also be improved so that better
forecasting reduces overproduction and over supply. Some food loss is unavoidable but it
must be utilised rather than just ending up in landfill.
As the survey progresses we hope to further investigate the causes of perishable food
loss and identify solutions to reduce perishable food loss globally.

University of Nottingham

20

September 2014

6. References
ACEDO, A. & EASDOWN, W. AVRDC-The World Vegetable Center's Postharvest Initiatives in South
Asia. National Conference on Pre-/Post Harvest Losses and Value Addition in Vegetables.,
12-13 July 2014 2014 Varanasi, India.
ADEME 2011. tude de prfiguration de lobligation de tri la source pour les producteurs de
biodchets. ADEME.
BUZBY, J. C. & HYMAN, J. 2012. Total and per capita value of food loss in the United States. Food
Policy, 37, 561-570.
BUZBY, J. C., WELLS, H. F. & HYMAN, J. 2014. The Estimated Amount, Value, and Calories of
Postharvest Food Losses at the Retail and Consumer Levels in the United States. Economic
Information Bulletin, United States Department of Agriculture, ii-33.
FAO. High-Level Multi-Stakeholder Consultation on Food Losses and Food Waste in Asia and the
Pacific Region, 27-28 August 2013 2013a Bangkok, Thailand.
FAO 2013b. Food Outlook - Bianunnual report on global food markets. FAO.
FAO, U. Asian and Pacific progress: Sustainable agriculture and rural development, . Regional
Implementation Meeting for Asia and the Pacific for 16th Session of the Commission on
Sustainable Development, 26-27 Nov 2008 2008 Jakarta, Indonesia.
FAO, W. 2012. IFAD. 2012. The state of food insecurity in the world, 8-11.
GUNDERS, D. 2012. Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm to fork
to landfill. Natural Resources Defense Council Issue Paper. August. This report was made
possible through the generous support of The California Endowment.
GUSTAVSSON, J., CEDERBERG, C., SONESSON, U., VAN OTTERDIJK, R. & MEYBECK, A. 2011. Global
food losses and food waste: extent, causes and prevention, FAO Rome.
KADER, A. Increasing food availability by reducing post harvest losses of fresh produce. 5th Int.
Postharvest Symposium. Retrieved, 2012.
KRANERT, M. 2012. Determination of discarded food and proposals for a minimization of food
wastage in Germany. University of Stuttgart.
QUESTED, T. & JOHNSON, H. 2009. Household food and drink waste in the UK: final report, Wastes
& Resources Action Programme (WRAP).
RAAB, V., PETERSEN, B. & KREYENSCHMIDT, J. 2011. Temperature monitoring in meat supply
chains. British Food Journal, 113, 1267-1289.
REISINGER, H., DOMENIG, M., THALER, P. & LAMPERT, C. 2012. Rckstnde aus der Nahrungsund Genussmittelproduktion. Vienna: Umweltbundesamt
ROSSAINT, S. & KREYENSCHMIDT, J. 2014. Intelligent label - a new way to support food waste
reduction. . Waste and Resource Management.
SCHNEIDER, F., PART, F., LEBERSORGER, S. & BOHM, K. 2012. Sekundrstudie Lebensmittelabflle
in sterreich. ABF-BKOU. . unpublished. Vienna: Umweltbundesamt.
WEINBERGER, K., GENOVA II, C. & ACEDO, A. 2008. Quantifying postharvest loss in vegetables
along the supply chain in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. International Journal of Postharvest
Technology and Innovation, 1, 288-297.

University of Nottingham

21

September 2014

Appendix 1.

Stage 1 survey questions

1. Which of the following best describes your area of expertise

Logistics
Food Science/Microbiology
Economics
Policy/Government
Other - Please specify
2. To which region or country does your expertise relate?
Global
Africa
Asia
Europe
Middle East
Latin America
North America
Countries - Please specify
3. How much food is lost in the perishables supply
chain
in
your
region/country of expertise? Please cite
references where
appropriate.
4. How much perishable food is also wasted in your region/country?
5. What are the major causes of food loss in the perishables supply chain in your
region/country?
6. How could food loss in the perishables supply chain be reduced in your
region/country?
7. What would be the financial cost (e.g. for infrastructure improvements) of
reducing food loss in the perishables supply chain in your region/country?
8. What would be the impact of reducing food loss in the perishables supply chain in
your region/country?
9. How many more people would you estimate could be fed in your region/country
if food loss in the perishables supply chain was reduced?
10. What are the possible approaches to unavoidable food loss utilisation (e.g.
anaerobic digestion)?
11. Any other comments?

University of Nottingham

22

September 2014

Appendix 2.

Questionnaire responders

Table 4. List of questionnaire responders.

Name
Dr Antonio Acedo
Cara Ammon
Dr Raymond
Anthony
Selina Juul
Sammy Kariuki
Dr Judith
Kreyenschmidt
Daniel Krohm
Hortense Montoux
Dr Diego Naziri
Dr Hubert Reisinger
Joan Rosen
Marc Sadler
Michael Silverstein
Dr Barbara Sturm
Eric Trachtenberg
David Williams

Organisation
AVRDC - The World
Vegetable Center
Nielsen Perishables
Group
University of Alaska
Anchorage
Stop Wasting Food
Tymax Agribusiness
Solutions Limited
University of Bonn

Area of expertise
Postharvest technology of vegetables
and fruits
Food handling practices

Region(s) of expertise
Asia

Ethical aspects,
including environmental
Policy/Government, Campaigning
Agribusiness Specialist

North America

Logistics, Food Science/Microbiology

Europe

Feeding America
Bio Intelligence Service
University of Greenwich
Umweltbundesamt

Food banking
Environment
Economics
Waste prevention expert,
environmental policy consultancy
Food Science/Microbiology
Logistics, Policy/Government
Economics, Consulting
Postharvest processing
Economics, Policy/Government
Crop Storage, transport & primary
processing

North America
Europe
Africa, Asia
Europe, Austria

JC Rosen Resources
World Bank
Boston Consulting Group
Newcastle University
McLarty Associates
IMechE

University of Nottingham

23

North America

Europe
East Africa

Europe, North America

Global
North America
Africa, Europe
Global
Africa, Europe, Middle East,
North America

September 2014

Appendix 3.

Further comments on infrastructure

Further comments from David Williams (IMechE, UK) on infrastructure:

I have visited numerous crop stores in countries including the former Soviet Union (Russian
Federation, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Kyrghyzstan, Georgia), Africa (Tanzania and Zambia), Iraq,
Afghanistan and DPR Korea where lack of reliable electrical supplies was a major limiting
factor. In Southern Afghanistan, a programme in which I worked installed small scale cold
storage facilities for grapes, pomegranates and vegetables. These were not successful
because there was no reliable mains power supply and the cost of importing diesel through
a war zone to run generators increased the cost of power to unsustainable levels [for
storage of primary products]. A much larger programme erected a large cold store in
Kandahar with a great deal of publicity. To my knowledge has never been used for the same
reason of lack of reliable and affordable electrical power. But making a realistic estimate for
providing power in that area is a challenge in itself. The military has attempted to refurbish
the local hydro-electric station, but 8 years on, it still is not in action. I was hired to
commission several fruit processing units in Northern Afghanistan, these also failed as none
of the sites had access to either potable water or to electricity. The German development
programmes under GIZ have attempted to address both issues by installing several minihydro schemes, but once again the real cost is difficult to determine. In Kazakhstan and DPR
Korea, power is controlled by politicians and is only available in rural areas for limited
periods. Once again it is severely limited due to lack of supply or poor distribution networks.
Estimating the cost of improving both is a major task in itself.
In Tanzania, I visited multiple small scale processing facilities. Most were idle for days at
a time due to lack of power. I visited one site that was equipped with state of the art
equipment [Mainly provided by international donors]. This equipment was all lying idle
due to lack of power and the processing was being carried out by hand, in appalling
conditions I understand that cold storage outside Dar es Salaam is barely developed for
the same reason, lack of reliable power. Some companies are currently developing solar
powered cold storage units, but which is more cost effective, providing stand-alone solar
units, or mains powered facilities? I don't think we are at the stage just yet where we
can provide answers.
Transport and loading/unloading facilities are also sadly lacking as are crates and boxes
to protect the produce [except for exporter companies]. Again in Afghanistan, I've seen a
tomato processor that has been provided with crates intended to reduce transport
damage, but these were stacked unused because the main carrying vehicles were
bicycles and motorcycles, neither of which are compatible with rectangular crates. As a
result, the tomatoes were being carried in plastic bags which caused loss due to
mechanical and thermal effects.

University of Nottingham

24

September 2014

Appendix 4.

Post-harvest cassava losses

Post-harvest cassava losses (Dr Diego Naziri, University of Greenwich).

Ghana: about 50% of roots reach the final consumer (HH) in fresh form. It will be
mainly pounded into Fufu at home (different than the Nigerian one). The roots
must go through the whole VC in the fresh perishable form
Nigeria: roots mainly spoil at the yard of processing sites due to poor fine-tuning
of the procurement (delays in processing and roots left exposed to adverse
weather conditions)
Thailand: mechanization, large farms and no poor villagers scavenging for leftovers
determine high losses on farm during harvesting. In Africa plot sizes are considerably
smaller and there are fewer leftover during the manual harvesting. Moreover roots
that are broken during the harvesting are left in the field while in less developed
countries there is always a way to minimize these losses, possibly diverting these
broken roots to lower value sub-chains (for instance processing them into kokonte in
Ghana). Other important losses during the handling of dry chips in the form of dust
Vietnam: most losses are incurred either at the processing stage (due to considerable
amount of roots that spoil at the chip processing yard) or during transport and
trading (at large extent related to the wet starch sub-chain in Northern Vietnam
where considerable volumes of fresh roots have to be transported from the
mountainous areas in the Northern regions to the outskirt of Hanoi where most
cottage level processing occurs). The dry starch value chain (typical of South
Vietnam) is efficient in minimizing the losses and this is proved by the fact that, while
it absorbs about 55% of cassava roots produced in the country, it is responsible for
just 18% of total physical losses.

University of Nottingham

25

September 2014

Appendix 5.

Post-harvest loss in Kenya

Post-harvest loss in Kenya by Sammy Kariuki (Tymax).

Poor harvest timing: Wrong harvesting period e.g. when its too hot leading to
dehydration
Poor harvesting methods. This results from harvesters not been keen and end up
wasting a lot of edible products through for example leaving good products in the
field that latter overgrows and thrown away.
Harvesting equipment: Use of substandard & dirty equipment. For example
harvesting tomatoes on broken crates that bruises the fruits leading to loss as
such wont access the market. Others include using these containers for multiple
activities such as using a jug to milk and still use it for holding tea.
Harvesting area: Having unhygienic harvesting areas for example milking dairy
animals in an open, dirty area especially when raining where mud get into the milk
Poor sorting and grading methods: Most of horticultural produce are sensitive to
temperatures hence if exposed for long when sorting and grading the quality
deteriorates. If one is not keen especially when dealing with huge volumes, a lot
of good product is wasted during sorting and grading stage by mixing good and
bad quality products. Furthermore, such waste is experienced during processing
through e.g. failure to observe FIFO policy on raw material usage leading to old
stock going bad
Hygiene: Poor hygiene for example use of dirty hands when milking affects milk
quality
Poor crop protection. There are pests (e.g. caterpillars) and diseases (.e.g.
anthracnose) which are not detected during harvesting and grading and
progressively affect quality.
Poor logistics: Poor logistics from the farms to the storage facilities and or
markets usually leads to huge losses. Some of the challenges include: Poor road network. Majority of the farms are located in rural areas where
there is poor road network. This makes it hard to transport the goods on time
due to cost involved, in accessible roads especially during the rainy season.
Un roadworthy vehicles: Transporting the goods in dirty, open vehicles
especially trucks exposing the food to sun which leads to dehydration,
dust, smoke which all affects produce quality
Contamination: Mixing of produce with other products or
equipment/products. Various goods are mixed in the same truck without
considering the effects on the produce for example transporting farm
inputs such as fertilizer together with inputs. Also when separated the
trucks are now well washed.
Mechanical damage of produce: There occurs a lot of mechanical damage
on the produce by stacking huge volumes together when transporting.
Poor storage facilities such as cold rooms. Most of the produce is stored in open
field and also in room temperature. This drastically reduces produce quality.
Lack of affordable storage chemicals.

University of Nottingham

26

September 2014

 Lack of organized markets. Production driven market as opposed to market

driven production. This leads to huge mismatch between market requirement
and production hence a lot of produce going to waste in times of excesses.
Rain fed agriculture: Majority of farmers rely on rain for production. This leads to
excess production especially after the rains. This applies to horticultural such as
cabbages and dairy where there is high milk production after the rains due to
increased fodder. This results to glut leading to huge food wastage.
Poor farmer capacity building: weak linkages between the research institutions
and the agricultural sector. Research on proper handling methods is not reaching
the end user
Open market: Most of the agricultural products are traded in the open air market
exposing the products to adverse weather hence affecting food quality leading to
huge losses
Weather: Weather affects consumption of particular goods. For example people
dont consume watermelon in high volumes during cold season. This affects
movement of goods from the shelves leading to quality deterioration and finally loss
Prices: Due to inefficiency along the entire value chain, the final consumer price is
usually high. This leads to less demand for particular products affecting movement

University of Nottingham

27

September 2014